Laserfiche WebLink
ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING <br />MINUTES FOR MAY 26, 1998 <br />( #11) #2365 Christine Valerius, 3750 Bayside Road - Sketch Plan - continued <br />Gaffron added that there would be park dedication fees and sewer connection fees totaling <br />approximately $20,000. <br />Gaffron confirmed that the entire property is within the MUSA boundary. <br />Christine Valerius distributed a handout stating her position and a letter supporting the <br />subdivision signed by the neighbors. She compared her proposed subdivision to that of Mr. <br />Evans on Landmark Drive noting that he was only granted one sewer unit; both her lots have <br />more dry buildable than his; he had one lakeshore lot and so does she; access is off Bayside Road <br />for both subdivisions; standards of the LR -lA zoning district are met; and she had twice as large <br />a buildable envelope as Evans. She referred to the 15' width variance stating that the existing <br />driveway was the reason for the configuration. She could redesign the lot lines so that only a <br />1' variance would be required, but it is aesthetically more pleasing to leave the driveway as it <br />exists. She asked Council to declare the property as sewered and grant a variance for lot width. <br />She expressed her concern that Council was changing the ordinance at the same time as her <br />application. <br />i <br />Jabbour commented that the applicant was proceeding with the thought that Council was against • <br />her proposal. He explained that the consideration to eliminate wetland credits was a result of the <br />recent Carpenter subdivision. The City does not want to provide a vehicle to allow greater <br />density in the two acre zones. The City was not aware that her application was coming before <br />Council. Gaffron confirmed that discussions about the applicant's proposed subdivision had taken <br />place prior to Council's request to look at eliminating wetland credits. <br />Kelley asked about the hardship for the width variance. Valerius responded that she wants to be <br />able to sell the property and not have to change the driveway. <br />Kelley stated he was not in favor of the subdivision and was not on the Council when the <br />Landmark drive subdivision was approved. He did not feel the present Council was bound by <br />decisions of past Councils. <br />Jabbour stated that the applicant has the right to proceed with the subdivision under the existing <br />code and she should be allowed to proceed and get the wetland credit. He added that proceeding <br />with the application did not mean the subdivision would be approved. <br />Peterson agreed that the subdivision request should be considered as an application prior to any <br />code changes. <br />0 <br />10 <br />